S.174 BNSS | Karnataka High Court Directs State To Frame Rules On Manner Of Recording Non-Cognizable Offences

The Karnataka High Court has asked the State Government to frame rules under Section 174 BNSS which mandates the police officer to lodge information on the commission of a non-cognizable offence in a book, in such form as prescribed under the relevant rules framed by the state government. The court said this after noting that even though BNSS came into force from July 1, 2024 till date no such rules have been framed by the state. For context, Section 174 (Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases), states that when information is given to an officer in charge of a police station of the commission within the limits of such station of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may by rules prescribe in this behalf. Justice V Srishananda in his order said “On careful consideration of the above provision, it is crystal clear that whenever an information is received by an officer in-charge of the police station within whose jurisdiction a non-cognizable offence has been committed, he is bound to enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in a book to be kept in the police station as the State Government may prescribe in the rules.” Following which it said “Even though BNSS, 2023 came into force from 01.07.2024, till today no rules are framed by the State. It is expected that the State would take necessary steps in this regard at the earliest.” The court has also directed the registry to forward a copy of this order to the Law Department for taking suitable action. The direction was given while allowing a petition filed by Asif and another who were charged under section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. It was claimed that the Police Inspector of Hutti police station had received credible information that near the new bus-stand of Hutti Town, some people were playing 'Matka' (betting/gambling) by announcing that for a rupee invested reward will be Rs.80 and were noting down the numbers. Thus he formed a raid team consisting of himself, sub staff and panchas. They raided the said place and noticed that present petitioners and others were found in the said place indulging in 'Matka'. The petitioners sought quashing of the offence contending that police did not follow the procedure as is contemplated under Section 174 of BNSS, 2023 and sought for quashing of the pending criminal proceedings. Notably, Section 174(2) mandates that no police officer shall investigate a noncognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. Perusing the provision the court observed that the informant should be referred to the Magistrate for obtaining necessary permission. It said that it is "incumbent on the SHO to forward the daily diary report of all such cases fortnightly to the Magistrate". "Sub-Section 2 of Section 174 of BNSS, 2023 creates an embargo on the police officer not to investigate such matters, where non-cognizable offence is made out without an order by the jurisdictional Magistrate, who has got power to try such offence or commit the case for trial. Jurisdictional Magistrate, based on the report/complaint may consider the contents of the complaint or report and thereafter permit the police to investigate the matter by passing an order in writing," the court said. The bench on going through the records and the provision observed that admittedly the offence alleged against the petitioners is "non-cognizable in nature". "Without following the procedure as is contemplated under Section 174 of BNSS, 2023, the SHO has not only registered the case but investigated the matter and filed the final report. The same is not in accordance with law and therefore, impugned criminal proceedings has to be quashed," it said while allowing the plea. Case Title: Asif & ANR AND State of KarnatakaCounsel for petitioners:Advocate Shivanand V Pattanashetti for Petitioners.Counsel for respondent: HCGP Arati PatilCitation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 237Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201594 OF 2024Click Here To Read/Download Order

S.174 BNSS | Karnataka High Court Directs State To Frame Rules On Manner Of Recording Non-Cognizable Offences

Mustafa Plumber

Tags